The use and abuse of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature
Abbreviations are commonly used in medical literature. Their use has been associated with medical errors and they can be a source of irritation and misunderstanding. There are strict guidelines for their use. This study analysed the use of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature and compared adheren...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England 2010-04, Vol.92 (3), p.250-252 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 252 |
---|---|
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | 250 |
container_title | Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England |
container_volume | 92 |
creator | Kilshaw, Michael J Rooker, Jemma Harding, Ian J |
description | Abbreviations are commonly used in medical literature. Their use has been associated with medical errors and they can be a source of irritation and misunderstanding. There are strict guidelines for their use. This study analysed the use of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature and compared adherence with guidelines in a general orthopaedic and spinal journal. It also examined orthopaedic professionals' understanding of abbreviations.
The use of abbreviations in articles over a 3-month period in a general orthopaedic and spinal journal was analysed. The number of abbreviations and adherence with guidelines was recorded. A group of orthopaedic healthcare professionals were tested for their understanding of abbreviations.
Almost half of all abbreviations were not properly used and 30% of abbreviations were never defined. Abbreviations were used significantly more often in the spinal journal. Only 40% of abbreviations were correctly defined by the orthopaedic professionals tested.
Guidelines regarding the use of abbreviations are not being adhered to by authors or editors. The poor understanding of abbreviations underlines the importance of minimising their use and defining abbreviations when they are used. |
doi_str_mv | 10.1308/003588410X12628812458211 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733525866</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>733525866</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c189t-5927ab9ef3eb8d6682eb48ceb1501f253f9641dfbb486c9b37a10f02f6299a7a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6F6Q3T9VM0iQT8CLiFyx4WcFbSdoJW-m2a9IK_nu77OrN07wMzzsDD2MZ8GuQHG84lwqxAP4OQgtEEIVCAXDE5lAYzA1HeczmOyyfODljZyl9cA7WIJyymeBCSG7UnN2u1pSNiTLX1Znzu9SHKfhIX40bmr5LWdNlfRzW_dZR3VRZ2wwU3TBGOmcnwbWJLg5zwd4eH1b3z_ny9enl_m6ZV4B2yJUVxnlLQZLHWmsU5AusyIPiEISSweoC6uCnra6sl8YBD1wELax1xskFu9rf3cb-c6Q0lJsmVdS2rqN-TKWRUgmFWk8k7skq9ilFCuU2NhsXv0vg5U5d-Z-6qXp5eDL6DdV_xV9X8gfKBGkK</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>733525866</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>The use and abuse of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Kilshaw, Michael J ; Rooker, Jemma ; Harding, Ian J</creator><creatorcontrib>Kilshaw, Michael J ; Rooker, Jemma ; Harding, Ian J</creatorcontrib><description>Abbreviations are commonly used in medical literature. Their use has been associated with medical errors and they can be a source of irritation and misunderstanding. There are strict guidelines for their use. This study analysed the use of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature and compared adherence with guidelines in a general orthopaedic and spinal journal. It also examined orthopaedic professionals' understanding of abbreviations.
The use of abbreviations in articles over a 3-month period in a general orthopaedic and spinal journal was analysed. The number of abbreviations and adherence with guidelines was recorded. A group of orthopaedic healthcare professionals were tested for their understanding of abbreviations.
Almost half of all abbreviations were not properly used and 30% of abbreviations were never defined. Abbreviations were used significantly more often in the spinal journal. Only 40% of abbreviations were correctly defined by the orthopaedic professionals tested.
Guidelines regarding the use of abbreviations are not being adhered to by authors or editors. The poor understanding of abbreviations underlines the importance of minimising their use and defining abbreviations when they are used.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0035-8843</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1478-7083</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1308/003588410X12628812458211</identifier><identifier>PMID: 20223075</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England</publisher><subject>Abbreviations as Topic ; England ; Guideline Adherence ; Guidelines as Topic ; Humans ; Medical Staff, Hospital - standards ; Orthopedics - standards ; Orthopedics - statistics & numerical data ; Periodicals as Topic - standards ; Periodicals as Topic - statistics & numerical data ; Professional Competence</subject><ispartof>Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2010-04, Vol.92 (3), p.250-252</ispartof><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>314,777,781,27905,27906</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20223075$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Kilshaw, Michael J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rooker, Jemma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harding, Ian J</creatorcontrib><title>The use and abuse of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature</title><title>Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England</title><addtitle>Ann R Coll Surg Engl</addtitle><description>Abbreviations are commonly used in medical literature. Their use has been associated with medical errors and they can be a source of irritation and misunderstanding. There are strict guidelines for their use. This study analysed the use of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature and compared adherence with guidelines in a general orthopaedic and spinal journal. It also examined orthopaedic professionals' understanding of abbreviations.
The use of abbreviations in articles over a 3-month period in a general orthopaedic and spinal journal was analysed. The number of abbreviations and adherence with guidelines was recorded. A group of orthopaedic healthcare professionals were tested for their understanding of abbreviations.
Almost half of all abbreviations were not properly used and 30% of abbreviations were never defined. Abbreviations were used significantly more often in the spinal journal. Only 40% of abbreviations were correctly defined by the orthopaedic professionals tested.
Guidelines regarding the use of abbreviations are not being adhered to by authors or editors. The poor understanding of abbreviations underlines the importance of minimising their use and defining abbreviations when they are used.</description><subject>Abbreviations as Topic</subject><subject>England</subject><subject>Guideline Adherence</subject><subject>Guidelines as Topic</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Medical Staff, Hospital - standards</subject><subject>Orthopedics - standards</subject><subject>Orthopedics - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Periodicals as Topic - standards</subject><subject>Periodicals as Topic - statistics & numerical data</subject><subject>Professional Competence</subject><issn>0035-8843</issn><issn>1478-7083</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp1kE1LxDAQhoMo7rr6F6Q3T9VM0iQT8CLiFyx4WcFbSdoJW-m2a9IK_nu77OrN07wMzzsDD2MZ8GuQHG84lwqxAP4OQgtEEIVCAXDE5lAYzA1HeczmOyyfODljZyl9cA7WIJyymeBCSG7UnN2u1pSNiTLX1Znzu9SHKfhIX40bmr5LWdNlfRzW_dZR3VRZ2wwU3TBGOmcnwbWJLg5zwd4eH1b3z_ny9enl_m6ZV4B2yJUVxnlLQZLHWmsU5AusyIPiEISSweoC6uCnra6sl8YBD1wELax1xskFu9rf3cb-c6Q0lJsmVdS2rqN-TKWRUgmFWk8k7skq9ilFCuU2NhsXv0vg5U5d-Z-6qXp5eDL6DdV_xV9X8gfKBGkK</recordid><startdate>201004</startdate><enddate>201004</enddate><creator>Kilshaw, Michael J</creator><creator>Rooker, Jemma</creator><creator>Harding, Ian J</creator><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>201004</creationdate><title>The use and abuse of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature</title><author>Kilshaw, Michael J ; Rooker, Jemma ; Harding, Ian J</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c189t-5927ab9ef3eb8d6682eb48ceb1501f253f9641dfbb486c9b37a10f02f6299a7a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Abbreviations as Topic</topic><topic>England</topic><topic>Guideline Adherence</topic><topic>Guidelines as Topic</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Medical Staff, Hospital - standards</topic><topic>Orthopedics - standards</topic><topic>Orthopedics - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Periodicals as Topic - standards</topic><topic>Periodicals as Topic - statistics & numerical data</topic><topic>Professional Competence</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Kilshaw, Michael J</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Rooker, Jemma</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Harding, Ian J</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Kilshaw, Michael J</au><au>Rooker, Jemma</au><au>Harding, Ian J</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>The use and abuse of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature</atitle><jtitle>Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England</jtitle><addtitle>Ann R Coll Surg Engl</addtitle><date>2010-04</date><risdate>2010</risdate><volume>92</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>250</spage><epage>252</epage><pages>250-252</pages><issn>0035-8843</issn><eissn>1478-7083</eissn><abstract>Abbreviations are commonly used in medical literature. Their use has been associated with medical errors and they can be a source of irritation and misunderstanding. There are strict guidelines for their use. This study analysed the use of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature and compared adherence with guidelines in a general orthopaedic and spinal journal. It also examined orthopaedic professionals' understanding of abbreviations.
The use of abbreviations in articles over a 3-month period in a general orthopaedic and spinal journal was analysed. The number of abbreviations and adherence with guidelines was recorded. A group of orthopaedic healthcare professionals were tested for their understanding of abbreviations.
Almost half of all abbreviations were not properly used and 30% of abbreviations were never defined. Abbreviations were used significantly more often in the spinal journal. Only 40% of abbreviations were correctly defined by the orthopaedic professionals tested.
Guidelines regarding the use of abbreviations are not being adhered to by authors or editors. The poor understanding of abbreviations underlines the importance of minimising their use and defining abbreviations when they are used.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pmid>20223075</pmid><doi>10.1308/003588410X12628812458211</doi><tpages>3</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0035-8843 |
ispartof | Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England, 2010-04, Vol.92 (3), p.250-252 |
issn | 0035-8843 1478-7083 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_733525866 |
source | MEDLINE; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; PubMed Central; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
subjects | Abbreviations as Topic England Guideline Adherence Guidelines as Topic Humans Medical Staff, Hospital - standards Orthopedics - standards Orthopedics - statistics & numerical data Periodicals as Topic - standards Periodicals as Topic - statistics & numerical data Professional Competence |
title | The use and abuse of abbreviations in orthopaedic literature |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-18T01%3A05%3A38IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=The%20use%20and%20abuse%20of%20abbreviations%20in%20orthopaedic%20literature&rft.jtitle=Annals%20of%20the%20Royal%20College%20of%20Surgeons%20of%20England&rft.au=Kilshaw,%20Michael%20J&rft.date=2010-04&rft.volume=92&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=250&rft.epage=252&rft.pages=250-252&rft.issn=0035-8843&rft.eissn=1478-7083&rft_id=info:doi/10.1308/003588410X12628812458211&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E733525866%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=733525866&rft_id=info:pmid/20223075&rfr_iscdi=true |